# Justice Dept declines to prosecute Holder for contempt of Congress **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [June 29, 2012, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justice-dept-declines-to-prosecute-holder-for-contempt-of-congress/626732 "2012-06-29T20:41:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justice-dept-declines-to-prosecute-holder-for-contempt-of-congress/626732/1 "2012-06-29T20:41:22Z")
[Washington Post story here.](http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-republicans-win-contempt-vote-against-attorney-general-holder-but-legal-dispute-ahead/2012/06/29/gJQAO90xAW_story.html?wpisrc=al_comboNP_p) There are two items in the article that I have questions and doubts about. > [@](#): > > The Justice Department has declared that Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to withhold information … does not constitute a crime and he won’t be prosecuted for contempt of Congress. > [@](#): > > Deputy Attorney General James Cole says the decision is in line with long-standing Justice Department practice across administrations of both political parties. As to the first, it seems pretty damn premature to determine whether this was a crime, since it seems impossible there could have been any real investigation since the charge was made. That is, _unless_ the second claim by the deputy is true, that there is ample precedence for coming to this conclusion. Personally, I don’t recall any similar cases, FWIW, which isn’t a whole lot. So, what is the history behind this? ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justice-dept-declines-to-prosecute-holder-for-contempt-of-congress/626732/2 "2012-06-30T04:24:39Z")
I don’t know the history, but I know that if someone accuses you of an act that isn’t illegal, it takes no time and no investigation to conclude that there was no crime. It was apparently during the Reagan administration that the Justice department first refused to prosecute for contempt when executive privilege had been asserted, and that policy seems to have been sustained since then. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justice-dept-declines-to-prosecute-holder-for-contempt-of-congress/626732/3 "2012-06-30T04:45:54Z")
Contempt of Congress is a crime defined by statute – it’s not like they just made up the name of a crime to charge Holder with. The question is whether Holder’s actions, or his refusal to act, constitute a crime as defined by the statute. I don’t really see how this can be determined without some form of investigation – again, unless there is very clear precedent. How is it you say you don’t know the history, and yet make reference to some vague thing during the Reagan administration? Where did this come from? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justice-dept-declines-to-prosecute-holder-for-contempt-of-congress/626732/4 "2012-06-30T05:32:46Z")
What exactly are they supposed to investigate? The crime of contempt was determined by a Congressional vote. Is there some question about the legality of that vote? If Congress wants to investigate Holder, they can do it themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justice-dept-declines-to-prosecute-holder-for-contempt-of-congress/626732/5 "2012-06-30T05:41:13Z")
There supposed to investigated whether or not there’s sufficient evidence to prosecute. What that evidence would be, I dunno. What would be sufficient, or insufficient, I dunno either. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justice-dept-declines-to-prosecute-holder-for-contempt-of-congress/626732/6 "2012-06-30T06:03:06Z")
Sez who? If congress thinks a crime was committed, they should present the evidence. Prosecutors aren’t supposed to go on fishing expeditions. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justice-dept-declines-to-prosecute-holder-for-contempt-of-congress/626732/7 "2012-06-30T06:10:12Z")
Why are you asking me these questions? I dunno, which is why my OP is asking question about the history behind the JD’s announcement. If you know the answers, great, tell me. If you don’t, WTF are you doing in this thread? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2012, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justice-dept-declines-to-prosecute-holder-for-contempt-of-congress/626732/8 "2012-06-30T06:44:58Z")
Can’t sleep. Bored.